Can someone give me one benefit of Brexit.

[Tulipsroses]

It's going to be 4 years since we withdrew our membership in European Union. Apart from the passport colour (some people might prefer) can anyone name one positive change which happened since then.

Your MP bothers with meeting constituents, mine doesn't. #dklemon.

It's not really difficult to see why. Nobody thinks the Lib Dems will get enough votes to form a government, so they don't vote for them. It's not really rocket surgery.

Is that not an ackowledgement that voters did not agree with the LibDem revoke pledge.

@HannibalHeyes In which case, 52% voted against plowing on with Brexit...

I remember remain supporters saying 52% vote to leave was not a big enough margin to justify leaving the EU. So, how can 52% who supported remain or a second referendum in the 2019 GE be considered a big enough margin to prove that people had changed their minds?

Seems to be a case of:

I willl accept number which I wanted to hear, but will ignore numbers I didn't want hear

Because, in this case, both are as bad as each other, and hope for complete power. Whereas in civilised countries parties agree to work together for the good of the country, Labour and the Nat C's just want absolute power.

If correct, why did people not vote LibDems in 2019. Either the Cons or Labour will always be in Government if the other parties are ignored.

@WorldGlobeTrotter omg. They worked in the NHS and voted leave. Omg. Well what do they think now? Brexit has pretty much destroyed the NHS. They didn't see that the tories had starved it of funds? No. They didn't.

Plus it’s not a valid option to just band together parties, they need to form a gov in any case

If 2019 was run on a second referendum by Labour then support was really low

@Flyhigher They worked in the NHS and voted leave. Omg. Well what do they think now? Brexit has pretty much destroyed the NHS. They didn't see that the tories had starved it of funds? No. They didn't.

Both parents retired in the late 90s. In their view, the NHS had been crumbling for a long time regardless of which party was in government.

So, they thought any additional funding for the NHS was a good idea. If it could be financed by reducing the amount UK sends overseas, that was the best place to start. Helping other is okay, but not when it is a disadvantage to yourself. ie charity starts at home.

Is that not an ackowledgement that voters did not agree with the LibDem revoke pledge.

Is reading comprehension a problem?

I remember remain supporters saying 52% vote to leave was not a big enough margin to justify leaving the EU. So, how can 52% who supported remain or a second referendum in the 2019 GE be considered a big enough margin to prove that people had changed their minds?

If it's a justification for causing untold damage to our economy and people, why isn't it a justification for trying to fix that? Or are you just desperately trying to argue arse about tit?

If correct, why did people not vote LibDems in 2019. Either the Cons or Labour will always be in Government if the other parties are ignored.

I've already answered just a few posts ago...

Plus it’s not a valid option to just band together parties, they need to form a gov in any case

It would be if we had a fairer system of elections...

So, they thought any additional funding for the NHS was a good idea. If it could be financed by reducing the amount UK sends overseas, that was the best place to start. Helping other is okay, but not when it is a disadvantage to yourself. ie charity starts at home.

I.e. stupid and/or xenophobic...

Ultra confident (ie arrogant) the vote would be 100% to remain. I thought the result would be similar to the 2014 referendum in Scotland. Close, but overall remain.

We are in violent agreement here about Cameron. As I said earlier in the thread, he should have set a higher bar, say 60%. Not because I wanted to remain, but because it would have prevented a lot of the subsequent bickering. Wouldn't have changed that none of them had a plan either. What was that song? Que sera sera.

Why was support for Labour so low in 2019 given the offer of another referendum?

With a majority they wouldn’t have needed another party to do it

Did they run on the same offer in 2017? The result was up relative to 2019

@EasternStandard Plus it’s not a valid option to just band together parties, they need to form a gov in any case.

I agree

If 2019 was run on a second referendum by Labour then support was really low.

Figures have been challenged, but it was estimated that between 50%-60% of traditional labour supporters voted leave in 2016. So, labour played the half in and half out membership of the EU in an attempt to please everyone, which will always fail.

He does. Annoyingly, he's a really nice man, and a good MP, not necessarily because of his politics, but because he does a good job representing his constituency. It's a shame he represents the clowns.

I never knew that!

You're not in the north east are you?

In order to join the SM or CU we would have to negotiate it with the EU. Starmer can't negotiate because he isn't PM. Sunak can't negotiate because he won't be in the job this time next year.

No, I'm not. I don't see the relevance of location though?

@HappiestSleeping We are in violent agreement here about Cameron. As I said earlier in the thread, he should have set a higher bar, say 60%

Was there a bar in the 1975 referendum? I can't find any details on the internet. If there was, then yes do the same again in 2016. If not, maybe Cameron thought he would be accused of unfairly moving the goalposts on the basis that he was a remain supporter?

After Cameron's win in 2015, he should have initiated a feasibility study into the pros and cons of leaving the EU and make a plan to leave the EU if the outcome was a vote to leave before a referendum date was set. On the specific subject of the GFA he could have directed the BIC (British Irish Council) to decide how to maintain the agrements made in the GFA if there was a vote to leave the EU.

Neither happened and the referendum was called without any plan if the vote was leave.

Article 50 was developed over the period 2002 to 2009 by a Scottish guy, John Kinlochard. He too thought that no member would ever leave the EU!

The phrase:

If you don't have a plan, any road will take you there.

Comes to mind

I can't believe we even debate this. Brexit is a shitshow. It's totally humiliating. And anyone that voted for it is complicit!

@HannibalHeyes If it's a justification for causing untold damage to our economy and people, why isn't it a justification for trying to fix that? Or are you just desperately trying to argue arse about tit?

The 2016 referendum was a single subject. Hence, measuring the vote on % is okay. Elections are seat based un the current FPTP system which the UK electorate supports as evidenced by fact that almost every govenment in the UK has been either Cons or Labour.

I am not convinced the UK has experienced untold damage. Germany is the only EU country that has a larger GDP than UK since 2000. UK was fifth largest until, but now sixth as India has moved up the list. Germany is fourth, but wilL move to fifth when they too are passed by India.

I.e. stupid and/or xenophobic...

What do you hope to achieve or change by comments like this?

That's the problem. Brexit was never a single subject. It was sold as all kinds of panaceas to anyone who was gullible to believe the various snake oil salesmen.

What do you hope to achieve or change by comments like this?

Do I have to achieve something? Most posts on here don't really achieve very much, including your own...

I can't believe we even debate this. Brexit is a shitshow.

Others think not. Otherwise the result of the 2016 referendum would have been 100% to remain. Likewise, LibDems would have won 30 million+ votes in the 2019 GE

It's totally humiliating. And anyone that voted for it is complicit!

I thought people were allowed to choose for themselves how they vote?

So, far I have not seen experienced any changes (good or bad) to my life since the UK left the EU.

However, for posters like Happiest, who have lost their job, the word shitshow is understandable.

@HannibalHeyes That's the problem. Brexit was never a single subject.

To ensure equal balance between leave and remain on the ballot paper, it had to be binary choice. Listing different options was not possible as it would never be agreed what the options could be.

This is amplified in Article 50 which states the memeber who has chosen to depart from the EU shall do so with a deal or without a deal. No commets made about what a deal should be. Nor are there any caveats that if a deal can't be made, the member who served notice to trigger Article 50 shall revoke.

A further referendum of whether to leave with the WA offered by the EU or to leave without a deal would have been consistent with Article 50, but did not happen

It was sold as all kinds of panaceas to anyone who was gullible to believe the various snake oil salesmen.

Election of the LibDems in the 2019 GE by the 16.1 million remain supporters would have cancelled Brexit, but did not happen.

The useless twat that was my MEP is no longer swanning to and from Brussels, living in a smart flat there paid for by my tax and and earning 5x what he deserved for doing nothing much. Hooray!

drowninginsick · 06/12/2023 12:53

This again! Suck me I'm a remainer but you're giving us a bad name this has been posted so often and just an excuse to bash people who voted differently up us YEARS AGO

Based on the recent posts on this thread, I share your comments.

Elections are seat based un the current FPTP system which the UK electorate supports as evidenced by fact that almost every govenment in the UK has been either Cons or Labour.

In the interests of factual accuracynI would like to point out there have been more Whig and Liberal governments of the UK than Labour governments.